Tone policing

Tone policing
A tone argument (also called tone policing) is a type of ad hominem aimed at the tone of an argument instead of its factual or logical content in order to dismiss a person's argument. Ignoring the truth or falsity of a statement, a tone argument instead focuses on the emotion with which it is expressed. This is a logical fallacy because a person can be angry while still being rational. Nonetheless, a tone argument may be useful when responding to a statement that itself does not have rational content, such as an appeal to emotion.
The notion of tone policing became widespread in U.S. social activist circles by the mid-2010s. It was widely disseminated in a 2015 comic issued by the Everyday Feminism website. Activists have argued that tone policing has been regularly employed against feminist and anti-racism advocates, criticizing the way that they presented their arguments rather than engaging with the arguments themselves.
Proponents of this viewpoint contend that these expectations tend to give preference to a specific mode of communication often associated with traits like masculinity, high levels of education, and a detached, "rational" style of expression. They argue that this emphasis on a particular communication style may inadvertently reinforce existing societal inequalities, including those rooted in colonial history, White-supremacist structures, cis-hetero-patriarchy, and capitalist systems.
Critics point out that the exclusionary effect tone policing brings may disproportionately affect people of color, who are more likely to belong to lower socioeconomic groups. It may also marginalize individuals who naturally incorporate diverse linguistic features, including frequent use of filler words such as "like" and "um," and employ vocal variety, including vocal fry and uptalk, in their speech. Notably, in the realm of social justice, scholars and experts often underscore the significance of emotions, such as anger, as they are frequently associated with personal experiences of injustice and can serve as motivators for those engaged in social change efforts.
The proliferation of social media platforms has contributed to the prevalence of tone policing in online discussions, particularly in contexts characterized by brevity and anonymity. In these digital environments, there is an increased focus on tone over substantive arguments.
Psychological research has explored the potential effects of tone policing, suggesting that individuals consistently subjected to such policing can experience frustration, feelings of silencing, and self-doubt. This psychological toll can significantly deter individuals from actively participating in conversations pertaining to social justice matters.
Additionally, it is noteworthy that educational institutions can be spaces where tone policing manifests, particularly when students advocate for change or raise concerns about systemic inequalities. This may influence communication norms within academic settings.
1968 Miss America protest
Tone policing first became apparent after the 1968 Miss America protest. The protest was the combination of the Women's Liberation movement and the African American Civil rights advocates. The protestors took to the stage and threw their bras and other traditional feminine products into a trash can. This was a symbolic gesture of women throwing away stereotypical "women" belongings and becoming more than just a gender. However the gesture was misinterpreted and constructed to convey these protestors as "angry" feminists. The Post reporter Lindsy Van Gelder compared these protests to those of the Vietnam War. Gelder wrote:
"Lighting a match to a draft card or a flag has been a standard gambit of protest groups in recent years, but something new is due to go up in flames on Saturday. Would you believe a bra-burning?"
The Washington Post gave the story the headline "Bra Burners and Miss America" further cementing the image of "angry "feminists. Editorialist Harriet Van Horne commented, "If they can't be pretty, dammit, they can at least be quiet!" while other commentators believed this protest was due to jealousy or even sexual frustration. This act also hyper-sexualized the protestors as many commentators played on the image of bra-less women waving their burning bras in the air.
The protest is an example of tone policing as these women were depicted as wild, angry, unshaven, and radical. This protest was peaceful and symbolic in nature but was misconstrued by the media and morphed into an exaggeration that is well known today - the burning of the bra. This is now used as a derogatory classification for feminism. The focus was on the way the protest was presented not the actual argument itself.
2020 U.S. vice presidential debate
In the 2020 United States presidential election, the vice presidential debate was held between Mike Pence, the vice presidential candidate for the Republican candidate Donald Trump, and Kamala Harris, the candidate for Joe Biden, the democratic candidate.
Throughout the 2020 presidential campaign, Kamala Harris was specifically targeted by biased points of view and hateful remarks. Harris was disadvantaged by the "angry black woman" trope. Specifically in the 2020 Vice Presidential Debates, Harris was critiqued on the basis that she appeared "aggressive" and "angry". Harris was affected by tone policing as a result of the "assertiveness double-bind" when assertiveness is seen as confidence in men and aggressiveness in women. Throughout the debate, Harris was constantly interrupted by the then Vice President, Mike Pence. After being cut off once again, Harris stated "Mr. Vice President, I'm speaking", which was seen as aggressive and enraged because of the tone in her voice.
See also
Fallacy
Righteous indignation
References
Diversionary tactics
Relevance fallacies
Metaphors